Seems like it should be no big deal, but then you read the comments to the story and get convinced that there's a shitload of people out there that are medical miracles since it seems that they're too stupid to breathe and have their heart beat at the same time.

Hikohadon wrote:Seems like it should be no big deal, but then you read the comments to the story and get convinced that there's a shitload of people out there that are medical miracles since it seems that they're too stupid to breathe and have their heart beat at the same time.

Amen.

Seriously. I said elsewhere that this story will be a much better story when it's not a story at all.

It's fucking hard enough to live happily. Find it and live it for the short time we're here. And to the narrow minded assholes that can't get past this kind of thing, go back under your rock.

Hikohadon wrote:Seems like it should be no big deal, but then you read the comments to the story and get convinced that there's a shitload of people out there that are medical miracles since it seems that they're too stupid to breathe and have their heart beat at the same time.

I'm not familiar with Collins, but good for him. I do think that he will encounter far more support than otherwise. I hope so anyway.

Hikohadon wrote:Seems like it should be no big deal, but then you read the comments to the story and get convinced that there's a shitload of people out there that are medical miracles since it seems that they're too stupid to breathe and have their heart beat at the same time.

I'm not familiar with Collins, but good for him. I do think that he will encounter far more support than otherwise. I hope so anyway.

I don't see comments following the story, though.

Suuuure you're not familiar with Collins.......

Look, just like gay marriage, I don't give a shit. None of my business.

bookelly wrote:Meh. Who cares anymore? Everyone is a close friend of or relative of somebody gay. Or gay themselves. And nobody cares. It's nice to be living in the future.

You apparently have the awareness of a turnip. In the big 4 American sports leagues, there is currently one, count'em one, openly gay active player. Yesterday there were zero. That's why this is a big deal, because sports is perhaps the only institution we have that is so covered by the media and so homophobic at the same time (at least outside the RCC).

Maybe everyone is hunky dory with gays where you live, but that is definitely not the case in large parts of the country.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

His opinion basically boils down to that homosexuality is no more a sin than any of the multitude of other sins that Christians might commit, but we can't interpret the bible so literally. I'm not Christian and am having a hard time wrapping my head around that logic of sin A is ok therefore sin B is too. Care to explain that "Christian opinion"? Genuinely curious.

Not going to go back to CCD days but I really think this is the overriding message (and not the weight of a given sin and mortal/venial arguments):

The ministry of Christ was always about bringing people in - the poor, the sick, the sinners, the tax collectors, and more - never turning them away. One cannot reconcile the truths of a just God who loves unconditionally and values grace and free will with the condemnation of a homosexual person made in God's image. Christ came not to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

I mean, that's the gist of it all, right?

CAVSTRIBEBROWNSin07! wrote:

Triple-S wrote:

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:Here's Broussard's moronic statement. Because when a gay player comes out, we must get the Christian opinion...

His opinion basically boils down to that homosexuality is no more a sin than any of the multitude of other sins that Christians might commit, but we can't interpret the bible so literally. I'm not Christian and am having a hard time wrapping my head around that logic of sin A is ok therefore sin B is too. Care to explain that "Christian opinion"? Genuinely curious.

peeker643 wrote:Not going to go back to CCD days but I really think this is the overriding message (and not the weight of a given sin and mortal/venial arguments):

The ministry of Christ was always about bringing people in - the poor, the sick, the sinners, the tax collectors, and more - never turning them away. One cannot reconcile the truths of a just God who loves unconditionally and values grace and free will with the condemnation of a homosexual person made in God's image. Christ came not to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

I mean, that's the gist of it all, right?

So God loves unconditionally and values free will, but condemns those who sin - ie homosexuals. There is not necessarily anything contradictory there.

leadpipe wrote:Is this the same book with the story of that one cat who took two of each animal and put them on a boat so many cubits long?

Cause I'm not using that for reference material any more than I would Green Eggs and Ham in the kitchen.

It wasn't a cat that took two of all animals, Mike. That's just stupid. Plus that would have made for three cats and the math wouldn't work.

What I do find amusing is the guy banging his babysitter or the guy banging the Eagle Scout or the chick who's banging 6 different guys at work while she's embezzling from the petty cash drawer and poisoning her evil mother with incrementally larger doses of rat poison each day will cite this book as the reason that Jason Collins is an afront to all that Christianity stands for.

I don't believe the thought is that God condemns at all. It says, "Loves unconditionally.." That's what I mean by that being the gist of religion. And that some feel you don't honor that God if you're homesexual.

That's my guess.

CAVSTRIBEBROWNSin07! wrote:

peeker643 wrote:Not going to go back to CCD days but I really think this is the overriding message (and not the weight of a given sin and mortal/venial arguments):

The ministry of Christ was always about bringing people in - the poor, the sick, the sinners, the tax collectors, and more - never turning them away. One cannot reconcile the truths of a just God who loves unconditionally and values grace and free will with the condemnation of a homosexual person made in God's image. Christ came not to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.

I mean, that's the gist of it all, right?

So God loves unconditionally and values free will, but condemns those who sin - ie homosexuals. There is not necessarily anything contradictory there.

leadpipe wrote:Is this the same book with the story of that one cat who took two of each animal and put them on a boat so many cubits long?

Cause I'm not using that for reference material any more than I would Green Eggs and Ham in the kitchen.

It wasn't a cat that took two of all animals, Mike. That's just stupid. Plus that would have made for three cats and the math wouldn't work.

What I do find amusing is the guy banging his babysitter or the guy banging the Eagle Scout or the chick who's banging 6 different guys at work while she's embezzling from the petty cash drawer and poisoning her evil mother with incrementally larger doses of rat poison each day will cite this book as the reason that Jason Collins is an afront to all that Christianity stands for.

And no cherry picking from this literary masterpiece. If you're gonna cite the part about gays being the root of all evil, cite the part about slvary being apparently okey-dokey.

bookelly wrote:Meh. Who cares anymore? Everyone is a close friend of or relative of somebody gay. Or gay themselves. And nobody cares. It's nice to be living in the future.

You apparently have the awareness of a turnip. In the big 4 American sports leagues, there is currently one, count'em one, openly gay active player. Yesterday there were zero. That's why this is a big deal, because sports is perhaps the only institution we have that is so covered by the media and so homophobic at the same time (at least outside the RCC).

Maybe everyone is hunky dory with gays where you live, but that is definitely not the case in large parts of the country.

I was more referencing the being gay part. Not the athlete part which is of course significant. And true, out here on the left coast there is certainly a level of tolerance unlike other parts of the country.

It's easy to forget how it is in say, Erie, vs. West Hollywood or the Castro.

However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

Leviticus 25:44-46 If you want slaves, buy them from other nations (45) or from the foreigners who live in your own country, and make them your property. (46) You can own them, and even leave them to your children when you die, but do not make slaves of your own people or be cruel to them.

Titus 2:9"Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them"

1 Peter 2:18"Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.

Col 3:22"Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord."

If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.' If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

Old Testament God was a real cunt. He had no problem slaughtering countless people with floods, plagues, and fire from the sky that destroyed whole cities.

peeker643 wrote:His opinion basically boils down to that homosexuality is no more a sin than any of the multitude of other sins that Christians might commit, but we can't interpret the bible so literally. I'm not Christian and am having a hard time wrapping my head around that logic of sin A is ok therefore sin B is too. Care to explain that "Christian opinion"? Genuinely curious.

What Jesus said in the New Testament is "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

In other words, nobody is without sin, so nobody should judge anyone else for theirs. Or, don't be a hypocrite.

One single sin will send you to hell, so a lot of people take that to mean all sin is equal. Blowing up a preschool is equal to glancing at a nice rack. That's not true at all.

But that all falls under the New Testament. The Old Testament (obviously) came centuries before the New Testament, and foretells the coming of Christ (which kicks off the New Testament).

Think of it as "Old Law" and "New Law". In the US the old law was that you could own slaves. In today's law, you can't. Abe Lincoln and the Civil War was the game changer.

In Christianity the Old Testament is the old law and the New Testament is the current law, with Jesus Christ being the game changer.

My take on this whole thing is, yeah he is brave for coming out and all that, but some are comparing him to Jackie Robinson which is an absolute fuckin joke. Acceptance is an at all-time high for gays, it's actually trendy. Racism was at an all-time high when JR had the stones to play in the white man's league. Lost in all that is Larry Doby, who went through the same things Jackie did in the NL, but nobody gives a shit because he wasn't "the first".

I think Collins is using this to keep his name in people's minds as he looks for a contract during/after a lackluster career. And/or to leave his mark in sports. I mean, seriously, is there any other reason to remember a 34 year old 3.6 3.8 0.9 journeyman bench rider?

Spin wrote:My take on this whole thing is, yeah he is brave for coming out and all that, but some are comparing him to Jackie Robinson which is an absolute fuckin joke. Acceptance is an at all-time high for gays, it's actually trendy. Racism was at an all-time high when JR had the stones to play in the white man's league. Lost in all that is Larry Doby, who went through the same things Jackie did in the NL, but nobody gives a shit because he wasn't "the first".

I think Collins is using this to keep his name in people's minds as he looks for a contract during/after a lackluster career. And/or to leave his mark in sports. I mean, seriously, is there any other reason to remember a 34 year old 3.6 3.8 0.9 journeyman bench rider?

Yeah, he's probably just using this for attention. He's been such a spotlight whore his entire career.

leadpipe wrote:Is this the same book with the story of that one cat who took two of each animal and put them on a boat so many cubits long?

Cause I'm not using that for reference material any more than I would Green Eggs and Ham in the kitchen.

Slow clap.

I think if you're a Christian you should stick to the New Testament as the basis of your religion and treat the Old Testament as a group of parables that should not be taken at "word for word" value (which is exactly what my pastor advised when I was questioning the whole illogical nature of religion when I was 14, which is sound advice that still didn't prevent me from converting to atheism).

Cuz I'm pretty sure there's a lot in the OT that Jesus wouldn't have been down with.

The reality simply is "I'm uncomfortable with Situation X, so I will use my religious doctrine as my reason for condemning Situation X since I can get it to back up my held beliefs and is easy to hide behind."

peeker643 wrote:Not a spotlight whore, IMO. But he is at the end. He's an 'active' NBA player in name only right now as he could very well be done.

I think a far bigger impact will be when someone comes out in their prime or as a premier player in college.

Not minimizing the Collins impact. It's a big step.

This may be John Glenn orbiting the earth. But it ain't the moon landing.

It does remind me of when Michael Scott declared bankruptcy by walking out of his office and yelling "BANKRUPTCY"!

If your mission isn't to grab attention for yourself, you just stop hiding the fact that you're gay. Word will probably get out and you'll have to answer questions from media, and THEN you address it.

Fair enough and you're probably right. But neither of the Collins have ever been considered attention whores. They're both very intelligent and it may be a situation where Jason Collins sees this as a greater good and a worthwhile cause to champion.

peeker643 wrote:Not a spotlight whore, IMO. But he is at the end. He's an 'active' NBA player in name only right now as he could very well be done.

I think a far bigger impact will be when someone comes out in their prime or as a premier player in college.

Not minimizing the Collins impact. It's a big step.

This may be John Glenn orbiting the earth. But it ain't the moon landing.

It does remind me of when Michael Scott declared bankruptcy by walking out of his office and yelling "BANKRUPTCY"!

If your mission isn't to grab attention for yourself, you just stop hiding the fact that you're gay. Word will probably get out and you'll have to answer questions from media, and THEN you address it.

Fair enough and you're probably right. But neither of the Collins have ever been considered attention whores. They're both very intelligent and it may be a situation where Jason Collins sees this as a greater good and a worthwhile cause to champion.

Not putting him down necessarily, his mission could very well be to make such a public announcement in order to draw attention to the issue, though he would be the lightning rod. And maybe the issue needs attention drawn to it so we can out the Broussards of the world and stone them to death (as I'm sure their interpretation of the Bible would applaud).

But it was clearly done with the intent of drawing attention. Whether that was to place himself as a martyr to a cause... his motives are his own.

I just don't think I personally would've done it that way. I betcha there have been other players that have been on teams that everyone knew was gay but they didn't make a big announcement of it.

I am trying to stay off the "what specifically is sin" topic here. But I'd rather introduce a little philosophy into the discussion...

In the beginning, God created man in His own image. Ever since then, man has been making God in his image. We think we can create our God to be whatever we want Him to be. I believe that we think that since society changes its views on things, then God is coming along for the ride. And we can trace that back for centuries.

Bottom line is, IF we accept that there is a God, then we don't get to make the rules.

IF you believe in creation, then you can look at man and woman and kind of get the idea of why each was created the way they were. We can figure out the plan.

I do know for sure: We all have and do sin. All of us.I also believe that God calls us to not judge one another. But to love one another.I also believe that God loves the sinner (hence Jesus). Not so sure he's very fond of the sin.

I'll credit Brousard for not isolating his take to simply "gayness." He stated other sins that for some reason our society (and/or faith) does not think are hot topics. He (and his God) believes you shouldn't cheat on your wife or have premarital "relations."

"The nose of the bulldog has been slanted backwards so that he can breathe without letting go." -- Winston Churchill

OldDawg wrote:Bottom line is, IF we accept that there is a God, then we don't get to make the rules.

That's part of the problem - God (if he/she exists) hasn't said what the rules are.

The "rules" as they are were created by people 1000 to 3000 years ago, depending on what Testament you're referring to and which version (re-write) of the Bible it is. And if some dude from 3000 years ago claims that he is speaking on behalf of God - that God told him this or that - I tend to be very skeptical.

The "rules" are basically just laws to keep society in check. Don't murder, don't rape, don't steal... these are just basic tenets that are necessary to keep the village from eating itself.

And since the "rules" were written by society, they indeed should change as society does.

I personally have no issue with religion - I think everyone has their "God" to one extent or another. But Organized Religion? Well, that's just a hierarchy telling the masses what to think/do.

While nobody knows Collin's true and complete motives for sure, I find the view that he is doing this as some sort of attention grab for self glorification as, not only completely baseless, but overly cynical. There is absolutely NOTHING in the man's history that I am aware of that would support such a conclusion.

I've read here that he should have just lived his life in the open and any announcement such as this is unnecessary except to draw attention. Meanwhile in the real world Collins had 3 options as far as I can tell:

1. He could continue to live his life in the closet. For reasons he explained in the article he REASONABLY AND DESERVEDLY decided not to do that any more.2. He could just decide not to hide his homosexuality any more. Eventually people would catch on. Pictures of him would pop up on TMZ. There would be speculation and inevitably he would be on camera answering questions. Everything looking sordid and scandalous. Facing teammates who found out through paparazzi and Deadspin. You know, fun times.3. He could decide to come out on his own terms and explain his life and decision up front.

Which would you pick? Because everyone before him has picked option 1.

But he's doing it for attention, right? I'm sure he'd have prefered if it was all unnecessary and he could live openly and nobody would pay any attention. But that is fantasy land.

I'm sure part of his reason is that it will make it that much easier for the next guy or the inevitable superstar. And if that's the case it's a wonderful selfless thing. And judging by what I've read an heard of the man the last few days it seems FAR more likely than some ill-begotten grab for post career glory.

motherscratcher wrote:While nobody knows Collin's true and complete motives for sure, I find the view that he is doing this as some sort of attention grab for self glorification as, not only completely baseless, but overly cynical. There is absolutely NOTHING in the man's history that I am aware of that would support such a conclusion.

I've read here that he should have just lived his life in the open and any announcement such as this is unnecessary except to draw attention. Meanwhile in the real world Collins had 3 options as far as I can tell:

1. He could continue to live his life in the closet. For reasons he explained in the article he REASONABLY AND DESERVEDLY decided not to do that any more.2. He could just decide not to hide his homosexuality any more. Eventually people would catch on. Pictures of him would pop up on TMZ. There would be speculation and inevitably he would be on camera answering questions. Everything looking sordid and scandalous. Facing teammates who found out through paparazzi and Deadspin. You know, fun times.3. He could decide to come out on his own terms and explain his life and decision up front.

Which would you pick? Because everyone before him has picked option 1.

But he's doing it for attention, right? I'm sure he'd have prefered if it was all unnecessary and he could live openly and nobody would pay any attention. But that is fantasy land.

I'm sure part of his reason is that it will make it that much easier for the next guy or the inevitable superstar. And if that's the case it's a wonderful selfless thing. And judging by what I've read an heard of the man the last few days it seems FAR more likely than some ill-begotten grab for post career glory.

Yeesh, people. I don't know if he is or he isn't, I just know that I'd choose Option 2. I wouldn't feel the need to hide who I am, but I wouldn't go out of my way to make it an issue either. He might very well feel that he needed to make an announcement for a selfless reason such as to further "the cause", I just know that I personally could give a fuck about causes and would've been fine getting "discovered" naturally.

Especially if I'm flying under the radar like he is and TMZ could give a fuck about following me... unless I make an announcement.

Well, I applaud your fortitude and confidence that, if you were a gay professional athlete, you wouldn't have felt the need to hide it and we could have gotten this out I the way a decade ago. Especially considering that literally zero pro athletes decided to "just be themselves" until a few days ago, even though it apparently would have been no big deal.

I'm just saying that Collins didn't make this a story. Collins recognized that this would BE a story and reasonable decided to get out in front of it.